Enhanced displacement coefficient method for degrading multi-degree-of- freedom systems

Earthquake Spectra

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 311-326

  Erduran, Emrah ^a   Kunnath, Sashi K ^b  

^a NORSAR   (Norway)

^b University of California   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DEGREES OF FREEDOM (MECHANICS);

APPROXIMATE EXPRESSIONS; DISPLACEMENT COEFFICIENT METHODS; DISPLACEMENT DEMAND; MODIFICATION FACTORS; MULTI DEGREE OF FREEDOM SYSTEMS; NEAR FAULT GROUND MOTION; NONLINEAR SIMULATIONS; STRENGTH DEGRADATION;

ULTRASONIC DEVICES;

DISPLACEMENT; FAULTING; GROUND MOTION; NONLINEARITY; RESPONSE ANALYSIS; SEISMIC HAZARD; STIFFNESS; STRENGTH;

EID: 77958466191     PISSN: 87552930     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1193/1.3381157     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Aldear, S. D., and Miranda, A., 2005. Statistical evaluation of approximate methods for estimating max deformation demands on existing structures, J. Struct. Eng. 131, 160-172.
2. Akkar, S. D., and Metin, A., 2007. Assessment of improved nonlinear static procedures in FEMA 440, J. Struct. Eng., 133, 1237-1246.
3. Applied Technology Council (ATC), 1996. Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Vol 1, ATC-40, Redwood City, CA.
4. Applied Technology Council (ATC), 2005. Improvement of Nonlinear Static Seismic Analysis Procedures, FEMA-440, Redwood City, CA.
5. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2000. Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, FEMA 356, Washington, D.C.
6. Freeman, S. A., Nicoletti, J. P., and Tyrell, J. V., 1975. Evaluations of existing buildings for seismic risk- A case study of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Proceedings 1st U. S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Berkeley, CA.
7. Gulkan, P., and Sozen, M., 1974. Inelastic response of reinforced concrete structures to earth-quake motions, ACI J. 71, 604-610.
8. Gupta, A., and Krawinkler, H., 2000. Estimation of seismic drift demands for frame structures, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 29, 1287-1305.
9. International Code Council (ICC), 2000. International Building Code, Falls Church, VA.
10. Kowalsky, M. J., 1994. Displacement based design methodology for seismic design applied to RC bridge columns, Master's thesis, University of California, San Diego.
11. Luco, N., 2002. Probabilistic seismic demand analysis, SMRF connection fractures, and nearsource effects, Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University, California.
12. Mander, J. B., Priestley, M. J. N., and Park, R., 1988. Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete, J. Struct. Div. 114, 1804-1826.
13. Miranda, E., and Ruiz-Garcia, J., 2002. Evaluation of approx methods to estimate maximum inelastic displacement demand, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 31, 539-560.
14. OpenSEES, 2007. Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation. Available online; http://opensees.berkeley.edu.
15. PEER NGA Strong Motion Database (2009). http://peer.berkeley.edu/nga/ (Accessed 8/10/2009).
16. Ruiz-Garcia, J., and Miranda, E., 2003. Inelastic displacement ratios for evaluation of existing structures, Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 32, 1237-1258.